1) Every thing is going to die.
2) Life is going to take control over the universe, and the last step will be an Almighty being, with the power to go back on time and be the first of the creation, to be the father and the son at the same time.

If the possibility number 2) is truth, the Almighty may talk to us some way. like the first chapter of revelation.

Number two is a pretty big maybe.
Number one at least has some precedence.

The absolute truth resides in the end of the universe.

That seems as good a place to keep it as anywhere else. The liberals will never think to look for it there.

What’s your theory that proves that God exists?

“He is deep in the prog-tow… the pooka fever. He will not speak normal with thee again until he has passed through what is to come whenever the hell the damn thing is done.”
Mega-Kroykahs! Delude responsibly.

I think it’s possible that both 1 and 2 are true, since I’ve been thinking about ‘the anthropic principle.’
Let’s say intelligent life had a strong enough foothold in the universe previous to this one that it was able to embed some information somewhere that made it through the ‘big bang’. This information was favorable to life, and here we are with the possibility of inserting information even more favorable to intelligent life the next time around.
So there’s a situation of life and universes co-evolving, not depending on the survival of any individual life forms. Death is quite OK because information survives death, just as it does in human culture.

What we call ‘God’ might be our sense that some intelligence came before us and helped us get here. We may have been helped along by ‘people’ in other parts of the galaxy seeding organic compounds. Are those ‘people’ talking to us now? Maybe. Could their messages have gotten into the Bible and other sacred texts? Why not?
As was quoted in another thread - all advanced technology looks like magic to those who don’t understand how it works.

[quote author=“Nhoj Morley”]Number two is a pretty big maybe.
Number one at least has some precedence.

Not even a maybe. It’s more of a “why would anyone believe such nonsense?”

What do I care for a hell for oppressors? What good can hell do, since those children have already been tortured? And what becomes of harmony, if there is hell? I want to forgive. I want to embrace. I don’t want more suffering. And if the sufferings of children go to swell the sum of sufferings which was necessary to pay for truth, then I protest that the truth is not worth such a price.
-Ivan Karamazov

waltercat
Not even a maybe. It’s more of a “why would anyone believe such nonsense?”

Nhoj Morley & waltercat, do you see any other possibility to the future of the universe?

“why would anyone believe such nonsense?” it is the nature of life, since the beginning of culture, we try to conquest the universe and death, (do you remember mummies?), so those two possibilities that I mention, become choices to you right now:
1) Do you want to give up in the conquest of the universe, like Sam Harris does?
2) Or do you take the challenge, and take the control of the universe like your goal?

I know it sound nonsense, but if I tell you: I can frozen your death body, so in the future with new technology we bring you back to life, you will believe me (and if you have, pay millions to do it), so open your mind to the possibilities.
So you came to die or to conquest?——————————————————————————————————————-

Revelation 1:8

“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty”

[quote author=“netred972”]
Nhoj Morley & waltercat, do you see any other possibility to the future of the universe?

Billions and billions…

So you’re in cryogenics…
… and you’re suggesting that all Christians freeze themselves in some kind of underground bunker with a timer set for “The Rapture”.
Where do I send my check?

I welcome a newbie whose stuff is even more incoherent and incomprehensible than mine.
For purely selfish reasons, of course.

“He is deep in the prog-tow… the pooka fever. He will not speak normal with thee again until he has passed through what is to come whenever the hell the damn thing is done.”
Mega-Kroykahs! Delude responsibly.

[quote author=“Pat_Adducci”]Let’s say intelligent life had a strong enough foothold in the universe previous to this one that it was able to embed some information somewhere that made it through the ‘big bang’. As was quoted in another thread - all advanced technology looks like magic to those who don’t understand how it works.

That is a neat idea.

“He is deep in the prog-tow… the pooka fever. He will not speak normal with thee again until he has passed through what is to come whenever the hell the damn thing is done.”
Mega-Kroykahs! Delude responsibly.

That would be a Reality check, wouldn’t it? You know, the kind not written on fictitious intellectual capital? :D

[quote author=“Pat_Adducci”]So there’s a situation of life and universes co-evolving, not depending on the survival of any individual life forms. Death is quite OK because information survives death, just as it does in human culture.

We may have been helped along by ‘people’ in other parts of the galaxy seeding organic compounds. Are those ‘people’ talking to us now? Maybe. Could their messages have gotten into the Bible and other sacred texts? Why not?

The fictitious kind is where you bob your head, saying:

That is a neat idea.

and leave it at that. Maybe it’s in a stainless steel safe buried beneath the Washington Monument in D.C.! (Actually, in netred’s case, it might be La Tour Eiffel, or some other landmark on the Continent.) Spin the tumbler to the right, stop at ‘J’. Then spin it left, going one full turn, past ‘J’ and stop at ‘H’... back to the right, past ‘H’, then one full turn, and stop at ‘W’...

[quote author=“Pat_Adducci”]Are those ‘people’ talking to us now? Maybe.

One might paraphrase J.B.S Haldane by saying, “People who claim fairies exist are not only dumber than we suppose, they’re dumber than we can suppose.”

Pat, what makes you think any higher intelligence would care about us, particularly? The insects seem to have had a much better run at it….

What makes you so sure there was only one Big Bang that was the source of all the matter in the universe? It seems more likely to me that the “critical mass” for a Big Bang to occur is some subset of all the matter in the universe. Matter from one Big Bang probably spreads out and re-combines with matter from other Big Bangs, forming a really, really big black hole and then: Bang! There’s no reason we can’t avoid being part of some future Big Bang, as long as we steer clear of really big black holes. But, you know, we probably won’t bother because we’re just too short-sighted.

Do-gooding is like treating hemophilia. The real cure is to let hemophiliacs bleed to death—before they breed more hemophiliacs. - Robert Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land

[quote author=“waltercat”][quote author=“Nhoj Morley”]Number two is a pretty big maybe.
Number one at least has some precedence.

Not even a maybe. It’s more of a “why would anyone believe such nonsense?”

Hey, guys, you know how rich we are? Rich enough to have time and energy to play around with ideas. We don’t have to work all the time, and we don’t have to stick to old beliefs.
For example:
Edward Harrison author of ‘Cosmology: the science of the universe’
Cambridge University Press 2000 quoted by Paul Davies in ‘Cosmic Jackpot’:
“If one accepts that there are many universes and that universes can be created by natural processes with different laws, constants, and initial conditions, it is but a small step to the speculation that our universe is the engineered product of an intelligent designer who evolved naturally in an earlier universe. Harrison envisages a random ensemble of universes in which some pocket universes give rise to life and intelligence purely by chance. One of these universes develops a superintelligence so technologically advanced that it becomes capable of creating baby universes to order…These baby universes are deliberately made to optimize life and observers. Our universe would then be the product of a natural god who evolved by good old Darwinian processes in a preceeding universe.”

“Harrison’s speculation carries echoes of Hoyle’s ‘superintelligence’ who has deliberately ‘monkeyed with the laws of physics’....
“The science writer James Gardner has adapted the same general concept into what he terms ‘the selfish biocosm’. His thesis is that the universe is a self-organizing, self-replicating system in which life and intelligence emerge to create new universes with life and intelligence.”
End of quotes

On a more personal note:
These ideas, while not believed adress my current question ‘Why do I feel so blissfully at home and at one with my surroundings, and so convinced that while there will be ups and down, of course, I’m fundamentally connected to something indestructible?’
When contemplating the second law of thermodynamics, let us not forget the first.

Harrison sounds like he knows his shit. Provided, of course, that there aren’t some kind of inter-universal physical constraints on the possibility of making the jump from one universe to another. That’s always a danger. But since there’s no way for us to know right now, wouldn’t it be better to take the optimistic route and assume the leap can be made? To have faith in that eventual outcome, even though there’s nothing to indicate it it’s either possible or impossible? Take the faith of leap, so to speak?

The problem that confronts us then, of course, is if that same faith leads us to believe that the outcome is inevitable, provided we have faith in it. Because we’re not going to get there from where we are today, believe me. It’s going to take a lot more brainpower than we humans have. And computers will never really be any smarter than us. Not when it comes to figuring out stuff like jumping universes. No, there’s only one thing to do, right away: plan ahead!

Do-gooding is like treating hemophilia. The real cure is to let hemophiliacs bleed to death—before they breed more hemophiliacs. - Robert Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land

So you’re in cryogenics…
… and you’re suggesting that all Christians freeze themselves in some kind of underground bunker with a timer set for “The Rapture”.
Where do I send my check?

The cryogenics it was an example so you can digest the absolute truth.
I think cryogenics it seem possible to you.

Then if I tell you in 10,000 years science will no need to frozen your body, just with a hair scientist will bring you back to life. You might believe it.

Then if I tell you in 10,000,000 evolution will create a being Almighty. It will be hard to believe, but it is a possibility.

How the universe will end?
a) Death.
b) Life.

Any of those answers become an act of faith. If your faith is on death that’s your choice (and Sam’s), but not a single living being have death like a goal, from bacteria to whales, not a single civilization will take death like aspiration (except atheist).

Did you agree?———————————

Revelation 1:8

“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty”

Work has been busy. I told myself no more Harris-ing while I’m supposed to be working. I end up making thick, clumsy posts and designing extrusions with metaphysical properties. Sorry for the mess.

“He is deep in the prog-tow… the pooka fever. He will not speak normal with thee again until he has passed through what is to come whenever the hell the damn thing is done.”
Mega-Kroykahs! Delude responsibly.

[quote author=“netred972”]Then if I tell you in 10,000 years science will no need to frozen your body, just with a hair scientist will bring you back to life. You might believe it.

They might be able to create a clone of “you”, but it would not be “you” in any other sense, just like identical twins can have different personalities. The “new you” would have none of the knowledge of his genetic predecessor, but would be a mentally and intellectually completely different entity, though maybe identical in physical appearance. While instincts and certain behaviors may be transferred, memories cannot be transferred via DNA.

The problem with using theory to “prove” God’s existence is this - theists define God as forever beyond empirical science, so any theory is untestable.

This is a problem because theists insist that everyone must obey their god, and they conveniently provide the instructions that they claim originated with their god. No offense, but a theory about God’s existence is not a reason to allow theists to tell me how to life my life.